ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
MRI machine learning model predicts nerve root sedimentation in lumbar stenosis: a prospective study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To analyze MRI characteristics of the nerve root sedimentation sign (SedSign) in lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS) and to establish a risk model predicting its occurrence. Methods: A total of 1,138 narrow layers were divided into SedSign-positive (426 layers) and SedSign-negative (712 layers) groups. Key data included spinal canal diameters, dural sac dimensions, ligamentum flavum (LF) and epidural fat (EF) thickness, SedSign presence, lumbar disc herniation (LDH), high-intensity zone (HIZ), and EF classification. Comparisons used t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests. Recursive feature elimination with cross-validation (RFECV) was used to select predictive features, and models were established via random forest (RF), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithms and evaluated in terms of precision, recall, average F1 score, accuracy, and AUC. The optimal model was subject to SHAP analysis to explain the risk factors. Results: LSS patients with the SedSign had a greater degree of narrowing and were more likely to have increased EF, LDH, LF hypertrophy (LFH), and HIZ and to be older than those without the SedSign. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of sex ( Conclusion: Older patients, along with a greater degree of stenosis and changes in the dural sac and surrounding tissue structures, were identified as the main pathophysiological basis for the occurrence of the SedSign in LSS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.